WPC5< 5n_5GT^Q\))GW] #.Fub^1y_w?XC[ `^8Xx ]Ed4˽c 5t!q8$ y ^; P͹8F/P0)=1Z2gWa%fRV /;:׶h6t6$XLyԶ=1ljB7Ty%{:Z$VU{)Ik˂~sJo%jwI9FSG4BU<ϚB_ȿ(ͬfbej+$I(2 ce PX1:D_ pg^uIEl*{ 0U 0> 0! 0 0 0^ 0 0 0e 0 0 0 0O 0 0 0D 0 0t 0 0 0 0A 0 0 0- 0 0W 0 0 0Q! 0>" 0M" 0E# 0'$ 0 % 0% 0& 0' 0i( 02;) 0m) 0:i* 0Y* 0_* 0 [+ 0e, 0- B*/ D/0 D+F0 0q0 D/w2 02 06t3 03 0:4 0^4 0<J5 1e5U65U*!6 1uK6 726 0c6 0NU77q8I9 0~;E; 0D; B;;;;;b; ;;:;HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6V,,,,V0(@ Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,("  Z6Times New Roman Regular1 J1CCA103|xU    ' ib011r90ib011r9 .   \  `&Times New Roman*+ (_2623  ..*G+G (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ../%` ` hp x /   *8+8 (_24  ," hp x ,23  ..," hp x ,  *5+5 (_23 ` ) hp x )23  ..) hp x ) ` *2+2 (_22  &hhp x &23  ..&hhp x &  */+/ (_21  #p x #23  ..#p x #  *,+, (_20 h  p x 23  .. p x h *)+) (_19  pp x 23  ..pp x   *&+& (_18   x 23  .. x   *AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5  *GG (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ/%` ` hp x /   *88 (_15  ," hp x ,23  Ԁ," hp x ,  *55 (_14 ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ) hp x ) ` *22 (_13  &hhp x &23  Ԁ&hhp x &  *// (_12  #p x #23  Ԁ#p x #  *,, (_11 h  p x 23  Ԁ p x h *)) (_10  pp x 23  Ԁpp x   (&& &_9   x 23  Ԁ x   (AA &_8  5+ ` hp x 523  5+ ` hp x 5  (GG &_7   /%` ` hp x /23  /%` ` hp x /   (88 &_6  ," hp x ,23  ," hp x ,  (55 &_5 ` ) hp x )23  ) hp x ) ` (22 &_4  &hhp x &23  &hhp x &  (// &_3  #p x #23  #p x #  (,, &_2 h  p x 23   p x h ()) &_1  pp x 23  pp x   &&& $_   x 23   x   0AA.Normal  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition T  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(hh&H1  5+ ` hp x 5      5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H2  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H3  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H4  5+ ` hp x 5 XXX 5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H5  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H6  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  2DD0Address  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKJ<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard KJ<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted  /%  ,Kk %#/KJ<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/  <:zBottom of 7?(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?K%2A`Arial?  S\  `&Times New RomanS7@(X75+ ` hp x 5  &  d d>)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For7B(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?K%2A`Arial?  S\  `&Times New RomanS7@(X75+ ` hp x 5  >)2dxd0KS.SampleKJ<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKJ<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB   35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.<6X9`(Courier New%2A`Arial3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Li)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (O$ presentence CrimBRINKLEY DUIWedemeyerWoodallBledsoeTackettMozzioVerizon S($USUS.,    2    _N[XXThepartiesstipulatedthattheDefendanthadonepreviousDUIconviction.  S($USUS.,    1    _N[XXWenotethattheDefendantrequestedtobereferredtoasa she,however,forthesakeofclarity,wewill  refertotheDefendantwithmasculinepronouns.Thejudgmentofconvictionenteredinthetrialcourtindicatesthat q theDefendantisamale.(.(3($ !USUS.,      0  (#$  0   d- -SDU_6 0#Xd# [ !USUS.,  _XڟXXXXXڟ^  @@tt#XڟX\#wBXXڟINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @@%ATNASHVILLE#XڟXwB#XXڟ #  @  @` November17,2004Session F #XڟXo#XXڟ0 @ #XڟX #Xڟ#y .=# .ySTATEOFTENNESSEEv.#y ##X;8X y_#y XX;8 yԀSTEVENFREDERICKBRINKLEY #y C##X;8X y$#XڟXXX;8XXڟ  f #XڟX# DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforDavidsonCounty 7  @@t t No.2002T324FrankG.ClementJr.,Judge ! q @@*AVT) ` dE<` A /  @@No.M200302419CCAR3CDFiledDecember22,_2004_ (  AVT) ` dE<` A    TheDefendant,StevenFrederickBrinkley,R U#  1      #X;8XXXڟ#XڟXXX;8Ԁwasconvictedofdrivingundertheinfluenceofan   intoxicant( DUI),secondoffense,andviolationoftheimpliedconsentlaw.Onappeal,the  Defendantcontendsthattheevidencepresentedattrialisinsufficienttosustainhisconvictionfor v DUIbecause:(1)hewasnotin physicalcontrolofhisvehicle;and(2)theparkinglotwherehis _ vehiclewaslocatedwasnotapremisesfrequentedbythepublicatlarge.Findingnoreversible H error,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. 1 #X;8XXXڟ#XڟXXX;8#X;8XXXڟ #'XڟXXX;8   Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtAffirmed#X;8XXXڟ #XڟXXX;8  S RobertW.Wedemeyer,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichThomasT.Woodalland & AlanE.Glenn,JJ.,joined.  V.MichaelFox,Nashville,Tennessee,fortheappellant,StevenFrederickBrinkley.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;JenniferL.Bledsoe,AssistantAttorneyGeneral; c VictorS.Johnson,III,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andJenniferTackett,AssistantDistrictAttorney L  General#X;8XXXڟ~ #XڟXXX;8,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. 5!      OPINION  #W" #X;8XXXڟ #p XڟXXX;8@& I.Facts  #A#   #X;8XXXڟ #XڟXXX;8  ThiscasearisesoutoftheDefendantsconvictionsforasecondoffenseDUIandaviolation %!% oftheimpliedconsentlaw.TheDefendantwaivedhisrighttoajurytrial,and,onAugust7,2003, &!& thetrialcourtheldabenchtrialwherethefollowingevidencewaspresented.AnnMarieMozzio, '"' anofficerwiththeVanderbiltUniversityPoliceDepartment,testifiedthat,onFebruary28,2002, (#( sheencounteredtheDefendant.OfficerMozziotestifiedthat,around11:30p.m.onthatday,she h)$) ^ ^8;8XXdd8[ ^  noticedacarthat lookedoutofplace#X;8XXXڟS#XڟXXX;8parkedinaparkinglot.Shesaidthatsheroutinelydrove  pastthatparkinglotandnoticedthecarbecauseitwasnotparkedinaparkingspot.Theofficer  describedtheparkinglotwhereshesawtheDefendantscar.Shesaidthatitwasnotbarricadedoff  andtherewasneitherafencenorametalarmtoprohibitpeoplefromenteringorexiting.Shesaid k thattogettotheparkinglotonewouldhavetodriveonapublicroadway. T   Theofficertestifiedthat,whenshefirstnoticedthecar,shethoughtthecarbelongedtoone & v oftheVanderbiltPoliceDepartmentsdetectives,but,whensheexaminedthecarmoreclosely,she  _ noticedthatitwasnotoneoftheirdetectivessoshepulledbehindthecar.Theofficertestifiedthat,  H aftershepulledinbehindthevehicle,sheshinedaspotlightthroughthebackwindowofthecaronto  1  theDefendant.OfficerMozziotestifiedthatshegotoutofhercar,approachedtheDefendantscar,    andstarted bangingonthewindowsbecausetheDefendantwas slumpedoverinthedrivers   seatwiththecarrunning.Theofficersaidthat,whilethecarwasrunning,thevehiclewasnot   moving.Shesaidthatshepoundedonthewindowfor aminuteortwoandcalledforan   ambulancebecauseshethoughtthattheDefendantmayhavebeensufferingaheartattack.Shesaid n  that,thereafter,theDefendant cameto,andtheofficeraskedtheDefendanttorollthecarwindows W  down.TheofficersaidthattheDefendantstarted fumblingthroughthedoorlocksandthemirror @ moversandfinallytheofficertoldtheDefendanttoopenthecardoors,whichhedid. )y   Theofficersaidthat,whentheDefendantopenedthecardoors,the odorofalcoholwas K intense,sosheaskedtheDefendantifhehadbeendrinkingandtheDefendanttoldherthathehad 4 consumedthreedrinks.OfficerMozziosaidthatanotherofficercametoassistherandthattheother  officergavetheDefendantafieldsobrietytest,onwhichtheDefendantperformedpoorly.The  officersaidthat,ontheonelegstandtest,theDefendantwas fallingoverandcouldnotperform  it.Theofficersaidthat,inheropinion,theDefendantwasintoxicatedthatevening.    Oncrossexamination,theofficertestifiedthattheparkinglotwhereshefoundthe Z Defendantrequiresapermitinordertobelegallyparkedthere.Theofficersaidthat,inthatregard, C theparkinglotwasnotopentothepublic.Theofficersaidthatshecreateda towsliptohavethe ,| Defendantscartowedfromtheparkinglot.Theofficertestifiedthatshedidnotknowwhodrove e thecartotheparkinglot,andshedidnotknowhowlongthecarhadbeensittinginthatspot. N OfficerMozziosaidthat,whenshefoundtheDefendant,hehadaphoneinhishand.Theofficer  7 saidthattheweatherwascoldonthedayoftheincident.Onredirectexamination,theofficer !   testifiedthatthepublicwaspermittedtoparkintheparkinglotwithoutapermitwhentheywentto " ! Vanderbiltforbillingpurposes. #"   ShawnTaylor,anofficerwiththeMetropolitanPoliceDepartment,wasunavailableatthe t% $ timeofthetrial,butthepartiesstipulatedthat,hadhetestified,hewouldhavetestifiedasfollows: ]&!% 8  [TheDefendanthad]...obviousimpairment,bloodshot,wateryeyes,dilatedpupils, /(#' obviousodor,[and]slurredspeech.Iexplainedthenewimpliedconsentlaw. )h$( LicensecurrentlyrevokedforDUI,saidheunderstood,butrefusedthe_breat[h_] *Q%) alcoholtest.*:&*    +#'+   TheDefendantcalledRobertNeilJamestotestifyonhisbehalf.Jamestestifiedthathehad  knowntheDefendantforapproximatelythreeyearsandthat,onFebruary28,2002,hereceiveda  phonecallfromtheDefendantat10:01p.m.JamesidentifiedandtestifiedfromhisVerizoncell  phonebillfromFebruary28th.Jamestestifiedthat,whentheDefendantcalledhim,theDefendant k askedJamestocomeandpickhimupbecausehecouldnotdrive.Jamesstatedthathetoldthe T DefendantthathewouldcomeandgettheDefendantandthattheDefendantshouldwaitforhim. =  JamessaidthathecametoNashvilletoattempttopicktheDefendantup,buthecouldnotfindthe & v Defendantbecausehewouldnotanswerhiscellphone.  _   Oncrossexamination,JamestestifiedthathespokewiththeDefendantat8:51p.m.and,at  1  thattime,theDefendantwasleavingworkatSears.Hesaidthat,later,whenhespokewiththe    Defendantaround10:00p.m.,theDefendantaskedtobepickedupbecausetheDefendantwastoo   intoxicatedtodrive.TheDefendanttoldhimthat,whenhegotclosertoNashville,theDefendant   wouldgivehimhisexactlocation.JamestestifiedthathelivedanhourawayfromNashville,but   heleftimmediatelytogogettheDefendant.JamessaidthattheDefendantcalledhimagainat10:38 n  p.m.andtoldJamesthathewascoldandwaitinginhiscar.Jamessaidthat,afterthisconversation, W  hecalledtheDefendantscellphonemultipletimestoattempttogethisexactlocationbecausehe @ wasunfamiliarwiththisarea.HealsocalledtheDefendantshomenumbertomakesurethatthe )y Defendantwasnotathome.JamessaidthatheagainspokewiththeDefendantforapproximately b fifteenminutesat11:15andtheDefendantsaidhewasintheparkinglot.Jamescouldnotexplain K whyhecalledtheDefendantagainat12:00a.m.attheDefendantshouse.Onredirect 4 examination,JamessaidthathefoundoutthattheDefendanthadbeenarrested,andhehelpedthe  Defendantmakebailataround1:00a.m.    Basedupontheforegoing,thetrialcourtfoundtheDefendantguiltyofsecondoffenseDUIQ U#  2        andofviolationoftheimpliedconsentlaw.Insodoing,itstated: q 8  First,atapreviousmotiontosuppresshearing,Ididntaddthedefensespositionto C dismisswhichwastheareawherethearrestoccurredwasnotwithinthescopeofthe ,| statute,thatitwasnotpublicpropertyorpremisesgenerallyfrequentedbythe e public,etcetera.Itwasnotashoppingcenter,etcetera.N   8      8   ` Today[theDefendantscounsel]hasintroducedsomeevidenceconcerning !   thatissue,andhisconcernwasthatweshouldrevisitit.Ifindthattheevidencewas " ! insufficientformetochangemyfindingsormylegalconclusions....Thisparking #" lot,thoughithasasignreservedparkingpermittedonly,theofficerindicatedthatthe $# buildingsadjacenttothisparkinglotarepublicusebuildings.t% $   8      8   ` Myrecollectionisthattheyweremedicalrecordsofficesat_Vander[bilt_] F'"& MedicalCenter.Today,Iheardcommentsthatitwasbillingofficesorbilling /(#' records.Idontrememberwhich.Buttheevidencestillsuggeststhatitwasforthe )h$( publictouse,toconductsomebusinessattheVanderbiltMedicalCenter,andsoI  standbymypriorruling....8h  hphp 8      8   ` Now,thedefenseprettymuchstipulatestoeverything,butphysicalcontrol. k Thatstherealissueandquestionaboutit.Buttheevidenceisprettycompellingthat T the[_D]efendant_ԀwasimpairedandundertheinfluenceofanintoxicantinDavidson =  Countyatthetimeofthearrest.& v   8      8   ` TheVanderbiltpoliceofficerstestimonyclearlysuggestedthat.Therewas  H anoverwhelming...odorofalcohol...and...the[_D]efendant_Ԁwasnotableto  1  standtodothefieldsobrietytest.     8      8   ` Also,theotherofficer,ShawnTaylor...indicatedthat[he]believedthatthe   [_D]efendant_Ԁwasimpaired,undertheinfluence,andthefactualevidencesupports   that.Sotofindthatthe[_D]efendant_Ԁwasundertheinfluencefromanintoxicantto n  theissuesherenow,thequestionisphysicalcontrol.W    8         ` .... )y 8   ` Thetestimonyinthissituationwasthecarwasoperable.Theenginewas K running.The[_D]efendant_Ԁwasinthedriversseat.Thekeywasintheignition.The 4 motorwasrunning.The[_D]efendant_Ԁclearlywasinphysicalcontrol,butthe  [_D]efendant_Ԁwaspassedoutorasleep,whicheverrespectiveyouopttotake.   8   ` Thedifficultthingformeisthatthe[_D]efendant_Ԁwhentheofficerawoke  [him]saidthatIamwaitingforsomebodytopickmeup.Theresawitness,today, q thatcanfullycorroboratethat.Though,thewitness...timereferencesarevery Z confusingandtroubling,Ibelievethewitness.C   8   ` ButIalsobelievethattheressomeconfusionastowhenthewitness,Mr. e James,decidedtocometoNashvilletoassist[theDefendant]becauseErinistwo N hoursand[fifty]fiveminutesfromNashville. 7   8   ` _Verizon_srecordsmightbewrong.Mr.Jamescouldclearlyberight,butit " ! justseems[awfully]confusing,andthegentlemanmadean[awfully]goodpoint. #" Youweregettingdirectionstotheparkinglot.IfMr.Jamesthought[theDefendant] $# wasgoingtobeattheparkinglot,hewouldhavecalled_h[im_]onthemobile[phone t% $ andnot]athome,butthatmaycomeintothetimewarp.Butsadly,itdoesntreally ]&!% matter.F'"&      ` .... )h$( 8  ImboundtofollowthelawofTennessee,andtheliteraturewrittenandasour *:&* Courtshave_constr[ued_]it.IfindthatIamconvincedthat[theDefendant]didnot +#'+ intendtodrive,that[theDefendant]intendedtowaitforafriendtocomeandget  _h[im_]....Sothefriendwascomingtoget_h[im_],again,thetimeframesarescrewed  upastheymaybe,thatisirrelevant.   8   ` [TheDefendant]wasinphysicalcontrolof[the]car.[He]wasunderthe T influence.Itwasonanareafrequentedbythepublic,andIfind[theDefendant] =  guiltyofdrivingundertheinfluence.& v   __ThetrialcourtconvictedtheDefendantofasecondoffenseDUI.Thetrialcourtsentencedthe  H Defendanttoelevenmonthsandtwentyninedaysat100%,withallbutfortyfivedayssuspended  1  andorderedtheDefendanttoserveelevenmonthsandtwentyninedaysonprobation.Thetrial    courtalsoorderedtheDefendanttopaya$600fineandcompleteanalcoholtreatmentprogramand   thetrialcourtprohibitedtheDefendantfromdrivingfortwoyears.TheDefendantappealshis   conviction.   #X;8XXXڟ#X;8XXX;8@$ II.Analysis W   #X;8XXX;8G#X;8XXX;8  TheDefendantcontendsthattheevidencepresentedattrialisinsufficienttosustainhis *z conviction.Specifically,heassertsthat:(1)therestrictedparkinglotwherehewasfoundinhiscar c doesnotqualifyundertheapplicablestatuteasapremises frequentedbythepublic;(2)hewas L notinphysicalcontrolofthecarasdefinedbystatutebecausehewasusingthevehicleasa 5 temporaryshelter;and(3)therewasnoproofthathewasdrivingundertheinfluenceofan  intoxicant.#X;8XXX;8(H#WhenanaccusedchallengestheX;8XXX;8sufficiencyoftheevidence,anappellatecourts  standardofreviewiswhether,afterconsideringtheevidenceinthelightmostfavorabletothe  prosecution,anyrationaltrieroffactcouldhavefoundtheessentialelementsofthecrimebeyond  areasonabledoubt.Tenn.R.App.P.13(e);Jacksonv.Virginia,443U.S.307,324(1979);State r v.Carter,121S.W.3d579,588(Tenn.2003);Statev.Smith,24S.W.3d274,278(Tenn.2000). [ Thisruleappliestofindingsofguiltbasedupondirectevidence,circumstantialevidence,ora D combinationofbothdirectandcircumstantialevidence.Statev._Pendergrass_,13S.W.3d389,392 -} 93(Tenn.Crim.App.1999). f    Indeterminingthesufficiencyoftheevidence,thisCourtshouldnotreweighorreevaluate  8 theevidence.Statev._Buggs_,995S.W.2d102,105(Tenn.1999);Statev.Matthews,805S.W.2d !!  776,779(Tenn.Crim.App.1990).NormaythisCourtsubstituteitsinferencesforthosedrawnby " ! thetrieroffactfromtheevidence._Buggs_,995S.W.2d% \ %\Pat105;_Liakas_Ԁv.State,199Tenn.298,305, #" 286S.W.2d856,859(1956).Questionsconcerningthecredibilityofthewitnesses,theweightand $# valueoftheevidence,aswellasallfactualissuesraisedbytheevidenceareresolvedbythetrier u% $ offact._Liakas_,286S.W.2dat859.ThisCourtmustaffordtheStateofTennesseethestrongest ^&!% legitimateviewoftheevidencecontainedintherecord,aswellasallreasonableinferencesthatmay G'"& bedrawnfromtheevidence.Statev.Evans,838S.W.2d185,191(Tenn.1992).Becauseaverdict 0(#' ofguiltagainstadefendantremovesthepresumptionofinnocenceandraisesapresumptionofguilt, )i$( theconvictedcriminaldefendantbearstheburdenofshowingthattheevidencewaslegally *R%) insufficienttosustainaguiltyverdict.Id.#X;8XXX;8J# *;&* ___XڟXXX;8_ +$'+ #X;8XXXڟtU#X;8XXX;8  TennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection5510401(2003)provides:  8  (a)Itisunlawfulforanypersontodriveortobeinphysicalcontrolofany  automobileorothermotordrivenvehicleonanyofthepublicroadsandhighways k ofthestate,oronanystreetsoralleys,orwhileonthepremisesofanyshopping T center,trailerparkoranyapartmenthousecomplex,oranyotherpremiseswhichis =  generallyfrequentedbythepublicatlarge,while:& v   8  (1)Undertheinfluenceofanyintoxicant,marijuana,narcoticdrug,ordrug  H producingstimulatingeffectsonthecentralnervoussystem;or 1    8  (2)Thealcoholconcentrationinsuchpersonsbloodorbreathistenhundredthsof   onepercent(.10%)ormore.    @  A.PhysicalControl n     TheDefendantdoesnotcontendthathewasnotintoxicatedatthetimethathewasarrested A forDUI,ratherhecontendsthathewasnotinphysicalcontrolofhisvehicleatthetimeofhisarrest *z becausehewasusinghisvehicleasatemporaryshelter,andhadnointenttodrive.#X;8XXX;8U#X;8XXX;8 Wefirstnote c thatthisCourthaspreviouslyobservedthat thereisnoculpablementalstaterequiredforguiltof L drivingundertheinfluence.Statev.Turner,953S.W.2d213,215(Tenn.Crim.App.1996) 5 (citationsomitted);seealsoStatev.JamesIsaac_Mabe_,No.03C013402CR00051,1994WL  583210,at*2(Tenn.Crim.App.,atKnoxville,Oct.25,1994),noperm.app.filed(stating we  doubtthattheoffenseof[DUI]requiresasanelementthatthedefendanthavethespecificintentto  drivethevehicle,inadditiontohavingphysicalcontrol.).Therefore,inthecaseundersubmission,  theDefendantsassertionthathedidnothavetheintenttodrivehisvehicleisofnoconsequence r tothedeterminationofwhetherhewasinphysicalcontrolofhisvehicle,asisprohibitedbytheDUI [ statute. D   WenowturntoaddresswhethertheDefendantwasinphysicalcontrolofhisvehicle.The f TennesseeSupremeCourthasaddressedtheinterpretationoftheterm physicalcontrol.InState O v.Lawrence,849S.W.2d761,762(Tenn.1993)#X;8XXX;8[#X;8XXX;8,thedefendant,whowasintoxicated,wasasleep  8 insidehispickuptruck,whichwasparkedon,andblocking,anarrow,gravel,publicroad.Theissue !!  beforethecourtwaswhetherthedefendantsactionsconstituted physicalcontrolofhisvehicle " ! soastobesufficienttosustainhisDUIconviction.Id.TheCourtadoptedthe totalityofthe #" circumstancestestfordeterminingwhetheranaccusedhasphysicalcontrolofhisvehicle,stating: $# 8  [_T]he_Ԁtestallowsthetrieroffacttotakeintoaccountallcircumstances,i.e.,the ^&!% locationofthedefendantinrelationtothevehicle,thewhereaboutsoftheignition G'"& key,whetherthemotorwasrunning,thedefendantsability,butforhisintoxication, 0(#' todirecttheuseornonuseofthevehicle,ortheextenttowhichthevehicleitselfis )i$( capableofbeingoperatedormovedunderitsownpowerorotherwise.*R%)   eId.at765.Then,consideringthetotalityofthecircumstances,theCourtupheldthedefendantsDUI +$'+ conviction,stating, Thefactthatthe[_d]efendant_Ԁchosetoparkhisvehicleonacountryroadand  sleepofftheeffectsofthealcoholisimmaterial.Id.    InStatev.Butler,108S.W.3d845,847(Tenn.2003),thedefendant,whowasintoxicated, k wasseen wanderingaroundaparkinglotapproximatelyfiftyfeetfromtheentranceofaWalMart T andonehundredyardsfromhisinoperablemotorcyclewithasparkplugandasparkplugwrenchin =  hishand.TheCourtdeterminedthat#X;8XXX;88a#X;8XXX;8 theevidencewassufficienttosupportaconvictionfordriving & v undertheinfluencebasedonatheorythatthedefendant...wasinphysicalcontrolofthevehicle  _ whileintoxicated.Id.at849.TheCourt,consideringthetotalityofthecircumstances,heldthatthe  H defendantwasin reasonablycloseproximitytohismotorcycle(onehundredyards)and,whilethe  1  defendantsmotorcyclewasnotmoving, physicalcontroldoesnothingeonwhetherthevehicles    engineisrunningorwhetherthevehicleisinmotion.Id.at851(citingHesterv.State,196Tenn.   680,270S.W.2d321,322(1954)(holdingthatthevehiclesmotorrunningisnotrequired);Statev.   Ford,725S.W.2d689,69091(Tenn.Crim.App.1986)(holdingthatthevehicleinmotionisnot   required)).Further,theCourtheldthatthefourthfactorlistedinLawrence,whichconcerned the n  defendantsability,butforhisintoxication,todirecttheuseornonuseofthevehicleweighed W  heavilyagainstthedefendantbecausethedefendanthadrecentlyrenderedthemotorcycleinoperable. @ Id.TheCourtconcludedthat arationaljurorcouldhavefoundthatthedefendantinthiscasewas )y inphysicalcontrolofhisvehicle.Id. b   Inthecaseundersubmission,afterreviewingthetotalityofthecircumstancesandthefactors 4 enumeratedbytheCourtinLawrence,weconcludethatarationaltrieroffactcouldhavefoundthat  theDefendantwasinphysicalcontrolofhisvehicle.Thefirstfactor,concerningthelocationofthe  Defendantinrelationtothevehicle,weighsagainsttheDefendantbecausetheDefendantwasfound  inhisvehicle.Further,theDefendantskeywasinhiscarsignition,andthemotortothecarwas  running.Itisclearthat,butfortheDefendantsintoxication,hecouldhavedirectedtheuseornon q useofthevehicle.TheDefendantsassertionsthathewasusinghiscarasashelter,while Z corroborated,arenotrelevanttotheanalysisofwhetherhewasinphysicalcontrolofhisvehiclefor C purposesoftheDUIstatute.Therefore,thisissueiswithoutmerit. ,| #X;8XXX;8i#X;8XXX;8@$ B.Premises N   TheDefendantalsocontendsthattheevidenceisinsufficienttosustainhisconvictionbecause !"  theparkinglotwherehewasarrestedisnota premiseswhichisgenerallyfrequentedbythepublic " ! atlarge#X;8XXX;8s#X;8XXX;8. ThisCourtandtheTennesseeSupremeCourthaveheldthatparkinglotsarepremises #" generallyfrequentedbythepublicatlarge.See,e.g.,Statev._Ricky_ԀDale_McNeese_,No.03C01 $# 9707CC00273,1998WL318783,at*56(Tenn.Crim.App.,atKnoxville,Jun.18,1998),noperm. y% $ app.filed(affirmingaDUIconvictionwherethedefendantwasparkedinagravelparkinglotthat b&!% hadasignprohibitingtrespassers);Statev.FarrisJohnHunter,III,No.01C019504CC00118,1996 K'"& WL15662,at*1(Tenn.Crim.App.,atNashville,Jan.17,1996),_affd_Ԁonunrelatedissue941 4(#' S.W.2d56(Tenn.1997)(affirmingaDUIconvictionwherethedefendantwasapprehendedinhis )m$( vehicleataliquorstoreparkinglot);Statev.RaymondCarroll,No.02C019308CC00179,1995 *V%) WL568474,at*23(Tenn.Crim.App.,atJackson,Sept.27,1995),noperm.app.filed(affirming *?&* aDUIconvictionwherethedefendantwasapprehendedinacarwashparkinglot);Statev.Tina +('+ _Wiggs_,No.01C019310CC00346,1995WL324602,at*3(Tenn.Crim.App.,atNashville,May  30,1995),noperm.app.filed(affirmingaDUIconvictionwherethedefendantwasapprehendedin  hisvehicleinaconveniencestoreparkinglot).    Inthiscase,theissueiswhethertheDefendantwasapprehendedon anyotherpremises T whichisgenerallyfrequentedbythepublicatlarge.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.5510401(a). =  Vanderbiltsbuilding,theparkinglotofwhichtheDefendantwasapprehended,isapremises & v frequentedbythepublicatlarge.Officer_Mizzio_Ԁtestifiedthatthe#X;8XXX;89u#XڟXXX;8parkinglotwhereshefoundthe  _ Defendantrequiresapermitinordertobelegallyparkedthereand,inthatregard,thelotwasnot  H opentothepublic.Theofficeralsotestifiedthattheparkinglotwasnotbarricadedoff,andtherewas  1  nofenceorametalarmtoprohibitpeoplefromenteringorexiting.Further,shesaidthattogetto    theparkinglotonewouldhavetodriveonapublicroadway.#X;8XXXڟ}#XڟXXX;8ԀTheOfficeradditionallytestifiedthat   thepublicwaspermittedtoparkintheparkinglotwithoutapermitwhentheywenttoVanderbiltfor   billingpurposes.#X;8XXXڟ#XڟXXX;8Fromthistestimony,weconcludethatthetrieroffacthadsufficientevidenceto   determinethattheareawheretheDefendantwasparkedwasanareagenerallyfrequentedbythe n  publicatlarge.Thisissueiswithoutmerit.#X;8XXXڟ#X;8XXX;8 W     `     h      p @ss" III.Conclusion )y    Inaccordancewiththeforegoingreasoningandauthorities,#X;8XXX;8L#XڟXXX;8weconcludethatsufficient M evidenceexiststosustaintheDefendantsconviction.Therefore,weaffirmtheDefendants 6 conviction.#X;8XXXڟ#X;8XXX;8  #X;8XXX;8#XڟXXX;8   `     h     ___________________________________  ee   `     h     ROBERTW.WEDEMEYER,JUDGE#X;8XXXڟل#X;8XXX;8Ԁ#X;8XXX;8(#